Notice: You have been identified as a bot, so no internal UID will be assigned to you. If you are a real person messing with your useragent, you should change it back to something normal.
Anonymous A started this discussion 2 weeks ago#134,944
He owned human chattel slaves. He r*ped at least one of his underaged slaves (Sally) in a secret r*pe room he built into his house. He slaughtered countless innocent Native men, women, and children. He was also, apparently, a real asshole in person.
Mr. Black Boi double-posted this 2 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,435,180
But for real though, the American revolution is one of the most confusing things that ever happened in the history of the world, because how are you genociding native Americans, raping, murdering, and enslaving black people, and you’re writing about liberty, freedom of speech, human rights, and fighting against tyranny at the same time? Like they really didn’t see the irony in that?
Mr. Black Boi triple-posted this 2 weeks ago, 8 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,435,181
Although, it wasn’t completely genocide. Africa got colonized too but is still majority black with a white minority because Africans always had contact with Europeans for all of history (even if some people don’t like to hear that) so they have exactly the same resistance as Europeans to the European diseases that killed 90% of the native Americans and made it easy for whites to kill the rest and replace them. But that’s still kinda messed up though that you’d pick off the survivors from an epidemic that killed off 90% of two entire continents, that’s pretty low. It’s crazy, if you look into it, some of the estimates are that around 60 million people died from disease.
> Although, it wasn’t completely genocide. Africa got colonized too but is still majority black with a white minority because Africans always had contact with Europeans for all of history (even if some people don’t like to hear that) so they have exactly the same resistance as Europeans to the European diseases that killed 90% of the native Americans and made it easy for whites to kill the rest and replace them. But that’s still kinda messed up though that you’d pick off the survivors from an epidemic that killed off 90% of two entire continents, that’s pretty low. It’s crazy, if you look into it, some of the estimates are that around 60 million people died from disease.
One could forward a thesis that Europe’s severed contact from Africa was a disaster from all. I’m referring to the Islamic invasions. They effectively curtailed the Axum (Ethiopian) and other empires by severing trade routes. Instead you have slaver states and Barbary pirates. Sure, the Mali empire succeeded, as did other salt route empires like Somalia’s Ajuran Sultanate but that vital European-African route was cut. That’s lost exchange and tech transfer and, of course, the horrors of the trans-Atlantic slave trade.
The Axum Empire at peak even had the southern slice of the Arabian peninsula.
Mr. Black Boi joined in and replied with this 2 weeks ago, 7 hours later, 14 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,435,290
@previous (C)
I was looking into it, the explanation I always heard when I was a kid was that the Africans lost because they were less advanced technologically than the Europeans. When I started looking into it, I think it’s more complicated than that. Because the colonization of the Americas happened 500 years ago, but the colonization of the majority of Africa by Europeans only happened 200 years ago. I thought it was because Europeans had guns and Africans didn’t, but the more I looked into it, I don’t think that adds up, because Europeans had gunpowder for hundreds of years before they colonized Africa.
Mr. Black Boi double-posted this 2 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,435,291
I think it might have been the Industrial Revolution, but gunpowder and steel I don’t think were the real reason. Because west Africans actually were producing iron swords before Europeans got there, and they depicted Europeans with guns in some of their bronze statues. If you look up "Benin bronze guns" there are statues from Nigeria where they very clearly depict guns.
Mr. Black Boi triple-posted this 2 weeks ago, 7 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^][v]#1,435,293
Like I’ve always heard the idea that Africans were all tribal and living in small communities without writing or they weren’t very advanced, but I was curious about Nigeria and looking into it, I think that might actually not be accurate. They might have been closer to Europeans, they had writing and steel, and they had guns hundreds of years ago.